Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Crop Rotation with Resistant Potato and Solanum sisymbriifolium to Control Globodera pallida Cover

Crop Rotation with Resistant Potato and Solanum sisymbriifolium to Control Globodera pallida

Open Access
|Dec 2025

Figures & Tables

Figure 1:

Field microplot design for G. pallida containment. (A) Microplot design of three 19-l buckets consisting of an upper bucket, a middle half bucket, and a lower bucket. (B) The upper bucket had six 1-cm-diam holes drilled into the bottom for drainage, covered by 250-μm pore nylon mesh caulked into the bottom of the bucket with silicone. (C) The upper bucket of the microplot was filled with a layer of river rock approximately 7.6 cm in depth. (D) G. pallida cyst bags were attached to stakes placed in the microplots so that cyst bags would be in the anticipated root zone at a depth of approximately 15 cm below the soil surface. (E) Field soil was added to the upper bucket, approximately 25 cm in total depth. (F) The soil surface of the upper bucket covered with a layer of landscape fabric on top of a layer of 250-μm pore nylon mesh and 4-wk-old S. sisymbriifolium seedlings planted into the microplot.
Field microplot design for G. pallida containment. (A) Microplot design of three 19-l buckets consisting of an upper bucket, a middle half bucket, and a lower bucket. (B) The upper bucket had six 1-cm-diam holes drilled into the bottom for drainage, covered by 250-μm pore nylon mesh caulked into the bottom of the bucket with silicone. (C) The upper bucket of the microplot was filled with a layer of river rock approximately 7.6 cm in depth. (D) G. pallida cyst bags were attached to stakes placed in the microplots so that cyst bags would be in the anticipated root zone at a depth of approximately 15 cm below the soil surface. (E) Field soil was added to the upper bucket, approximately 25 cm in total depth. (F) The soil surface of the upper bucket covered with a layer of landscape fabric on top of a layer of 250-μm pore nylon mesh and 4-wk-old S. sisymbriifolium seedlings planted into the microplot.

Figure 2:

Mean percentage G. pallida egg hatch 2 wk after root exudate application. (A) Percentage egg hatch for root exudates was collected at 4 wk of growth. (B) Percentage of egg hatch for root exudates were collected at 6 wk of growth. Standard error of the means is indicated by the bars. Different letters indicate significantly different means based on least squares means at α = 0.05.
Mean percentage G. pallida egg hatch 2 wk after root exudate application. (A) Percentage egg hatch for root exudates was collected at 4 wk of growth. (B) Percentage of egg hatch for root exudates were collected at 6 wk of growth. Standard error of the means is indicated by the bars. Different letters indicate significantly different means based on least squares means at α = 0.05.

Figure 3:

Remaining viable G. pallida encysted eggs per cyst of the initial G. pallida population over the 3-yr rotation. The initial G. pallida population at the beginning of year 1 in rotation started with an average of 250 eggs/cyst and an initial infestation rate of 7.5 eggs/g soil. INN, Innovator; RB, russet Burbank; S. sisym., S. sisymbriifolium.
Remaining viable G. pallida encysted eggs per cyst of the initial G. pallida population over the 3-yr rotation. The initial G. pallida population at the beginning of year 1 in rotation started with an average of 250 eggs/cyst and an initial infestation rate of 7.5 eggs/g soil. INN, Innovator; RB, russet Burbank; S. sisym., S. sisymbriifolium.

Globodera pallida progeny cysts, final population (Pf), and RF over a 3-yr rotation_a

Rotation sequencebEnd year 1End year 2End year 3



Progeny cystscPf (eggs/g soil)dRF (Pf/Pi)eProgeny cystsPf (eggs/g soil)RF (Pf/Pi)Progeny cystsPf (eggs/g soil)RF (Pf/Pi)
INN-INN-RB0.1 ± 0.11.28 ± 0.07 a0.26 ± 0.02 a1.0 ± 0.2 a0.36 ± 0.08 a0.07 ± 0.02 a0.5 ± 0.1 a0.06 ± 0.01 ab0.011 ± 0.002 ab
INN-S. sisym.-RB0.1 ± 0.11.28 ± 0.07 a0.26 ± 0.02 a0.1 ± 0.1 b0.17 ± 0.06 b0.04 ± 0.01 b0.2 ± 0.1 bc0.04 ± 0.01 abc0.008 ± 0.002 abc
INN-Barley-RB0.1 ± 0.11.28 ± 0.07 a0.26 ± 0.02 a0.3 ± 0.2 b0.16 ± 0 b0.03 ± 0.01 b0.4 ± 0.1 b0.07 ± 0.02 a0.013 ± 0.004 a
S. sisym.-INN-RB00.79 ± 0.05 b0.16 ± 0.01 b0 b0.27 ± 0.07 ab0.05 ± 0.01 ab0.1 ± 0 bc0.06 ± 0.01 ab0.010 ± 0.002 ab
S. sisym.-S. sisym.-RB00.79 ± 0.05 b0.16 ± 0.01 b0 b0.15 ± 0.04 b0.03 ± 0.01 b0 c0.02 ± 0.01 c0.003 ± 0.001 c
S. sisym.-Barley-RB00.79 ± 0.05 b0.16 ± 0.01 b0 b0.14 ± 0.04 b0.03 ± 0.01 b0.2 ± 0.1 b0.04 ± 0.01 bc0.007 ± 0.003 bc

Remaining G_ pallida encysted egg densities, viability, and hatch at the end of the first year of rotation_a

Year 1 treatmentRemaining encysted eggs per cystRemaining viable encysted eggs per cystbEgg viability (%)bEgg hatch in PRD (%)c
‘Innovator’ resistant potato76.4 ± 5.563.8 ± 3.7 a88.5 ± 2.0 a4.2 ± 0.6
S. sisymbriifolium73.0 ± 5.139.3 ± 2.5 b58.4 ± 3.6 b5.4 ± 0.7

Rotation sequences with corresponding abbreviations_

Year 1Year 2Year 3Rotation sequence abbreviationa
‘Innovator’ resistant potato‘Innovator’ resistant potato‘Russet Burbank’ susceptible potatoINN-INN-RB
‘Innovator’ resistant potatoS. sisymbriifolium‘Russet Burbank’ susceptible potatoINN-S. sisym.-RB
‘Innovator’ resistant potatoBarley (non-host)‘Russet Burbank’ susceptible potatoINN-Barley-RB
S. sisymbriifolium‘Innovator’ resistant potato‘Russet Burbank’ susceptible potatoS. sisym.-INN-RB
S. sisymbriifoliumS. sisymbriifolium‘Russet Burbank’ susceptible potatoS. sisym.-S. sisym.-RB
S. sisymbriifoliumBarley (non-host)‘Russet Burbank’ susceptible potatoS. sisym.-Barley-RB
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jofnem-2025-0054 | Journal eISSN: 2640-396X | Journal ISSN: 0022-300X
Language: English
Submitted on: Jul 25, 2025
Published on: Dec 7, 2025
Published by: Society of Nematologists, Inc.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2025 Paige Hickman, Louise-Marie Dandurand, published by Society of Nematologists, Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.